Friday, March 28, 2014

Alex Hales hit a sensational unbeaten
hundred as England pulled off a dramatic six-wicket win over Sri Lanka to throw
open the Group I for semifinals places in the ICC World Twenty20, in Chittagong
on Thursday. Chasing a huge 190-run target, England rode on Hales’ magnificent
maiden T20 hundred to overhaul the target with four balls to spare after losing
two wickets for no score in the first over. Members of the U.N. Security
Council on Thursday condemned North
Korea's recent ballistic missile launch as a
violation of U.N. resolutions and will continue discussions on an
"appropriate response", the council president said.

This post is about Sri
Lanka, but certainly not Cricket …… the International reaction was
too varied … while Australia
voiced its opposition to an international investigation, David Cameron welcomed
the move. It is all about the UN
Resolution on Sri Lanka.
The United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution on Thursday to
launch an independent investigation into alleged atrocities in Sri Lanka,
despite fierce opposition and allegations of bias from Sri Lankan officials. Australia is
not one of the 47 voting members of the council but could have co-sponsored the
resolution if it backed the inquiry.

Twenty-three countries voted for the bill and
12 against and there were 12 abstentions ~ and India is part of the last 12 !!!. A United Nations resolution (UN
resolution) is a formal text adopted by a United Nations (UN) body. Although
any UN body can issue resolutions, in practice most resolutions are issued by
the Security Council or the General Assembly.
Overriding fierce objections from Sri Lanka, the United Nations Human
Rights Council voted to open an international investigation into possible war
crimes by both the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tiger rebels in the
final stages of a 26-year civil war thatended in 2009. The high commissioner,
Navi Pillay, had urged the creation of an independent inquiry on the grounds
that the Sri Lankan authorities had made little progress in investigating
possible war crimes during the military operations that crushed the Tamil
Tigers’ brutal rebellion to establish a homeland five years ago. That lack of
progress, Ms. Pillay added pointedly in a report to the council in February, is
“fundamentally a question of political will.” Sri Lankan investigations of the
military’s actions lack independence and credibility, she added.

The present vote is to be seen as the culmination of years
of mounting international pressure for a credible investigation. Two months
after the war ended, the Human Rights Council passed a resolution commending Sri Lanka’s
actions in ending it. Thursday’s vote came after Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the
council, Ravinatha Aryasinha, protested that the resolution represented “a grave
threat to the sovereignty of U.N. member states” and breached international
law. Ambassador Zamir Akram of Pakistan
said, “This resolution is about politics, not about human rights.” In this background comes the news that India, which had supported tamer resolutions on Sri Lanka’s war
in the last two years, backed both proposals, but abstained from the vote on
Thursday, saying it was concerned about the creation of an external
investigation with an open-ended mandate.

British Prime Minister David Cameron welcomed the decision
of the UNHRC to initiate its own independent investigation into alleged war
crimes in Sri Lanka.
"This is a victory for the people of Sri Lanka who need to know the
truth about what happened during those terrible years of the civil war so that
they can move forward," he said in a statement. While the U.S.-sponsored resolution was passed
with 23 votes in favour, the immediate neighbour where people have been
speaking on this for long – decided to abstain ! evoking mixed response in Sri Lanka. The resolution itself may not have made
everyone in Colombo as happy, but in terms of India’s
decision, it did bring some cheer to politicians and rulers of Lanka. In what
could be a major boost for Sri Lanka,
Russia, India, China
and South Africa
decided not to support the US-backed United Nations human rights resolution
against the island nation. Russia
and China have voted against
the motion while South Africa
and India
have abstained.

Looking at it, India
has vascillated from supporting Sri
Lanka, to voting against it in the last two
Human Rights council sessions and now abstaining from voting ! India while
defending its decision to abstain argued against the “intrusive” nature of the
resolution, said it was concerned that the resolution had the potential to
hinder the efforts of the country rather than contribute constructively to its
efforts, and “inadvertently complicate the situation.”

One good reason for the Indian decision could be the
condition internally – there could be a world of difference in what Delhi perceives as
against what those in Tamilnadu do.. UN High Commissioner Navi Pillay
recommended authorizing an investigation – India’s move may gain some
geo-political mileage. India’s only
domestic worry about the UNHRC vote has been the backlash from Tamil Nadu. On
both the occasions in the past, when US-led resolutions were passed against the
island nation, India
voted in its favour for fear of a backlash from Tamil Nadu after being publicly
indecisive till the last minute. Tamil Nadu witnessed widespread protests and
rallies demanding India
to vote in favour of the resolution. All the political parties in the state
wanted India
to support the resolution, with the Tamil Nadu assembly even unanimously asking
for it.

Now the elections have provided a newer perspective –
Congress perhaps has nothing to gain, DMK is no longer constituent of UPA. Congress for the first time is threatened to
be no serious contender with some of its frontline leaders refusing to contest
the elections. So, a decision of abstention on Lankan vote does no damage to
them. New Delhi has been concerned by its
curtailed geopolitical leverage with Sri Lanka,
with the island nation apparently favouring China
over India.
so now some political parties would attack as Congress not caring for the sentiments of tamils now and in the past too.

There is further news that elated by response at UN, Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa ordered the
release of all Indian fishermen in Sri Lankan custody for poaching. Narendra Rajapaksa, the fisheries ministry
spokesman is quoted as saying that at
least 98 Indian fishermen are under Sri Lankan custody for violating the IMBL.

Before the ink dries, comes the news that Union
Minister P Chidambaram said, "Personally, I feel India should
have supported the resolution." He is quoted as saying that there was no
unanimity among the parties in Tamil Nadu on the resolution and the ruling
Congress party took a neutral stand of abstaining ! ~ will it have any impact
in the elections in Tamil Nadu remains to be seen